February 26, 2012

Death by PETA?

This one was in this morning’s Daily Caller.

Documents published online this month show that People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, an organization known for its uncompromising animal-rights positions, killed more than 95 percent of the pets in its care in 2011.


These concerned, peaceful humanitarians of the liberal persuation sure know how to practice what they preach, don’t they?

The documents, obtained from the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, were published online by the Center for Consumer Freedom, a non-profit organization that runs online campaigns targeting groups that antagonize food producers.

Fifteen years’ worth of similar records show that since 1998 PETA has killed more than 27,000 animals at its headquarters in Norfolk, VA.

In a February 16 statement, the Center said PETA killed 1,911 cats and dogs last year, finding homes for only 24 pets.

“PETA hasn’t slowed down its slaughterhouse operation,” said Rick Berman, CCF’s executive director. “It appears PETA is more concerned with funding its media and advertising antics than finding suitable homes for these dogs and cats.”

In a statement, Berman added that PETA has a $37 million dollar annual budget.

His organization runs PETAkillsAnimals.com, which reports that in 2010 a resident of Virginia called PETA and asked if there was an animal shelter at the group’s headquarters. PETA responded that there was not.

I was recently at Bloomingdales (Lexington Avenue in Manhattan) and espied an anti-fur coat demonstration in front of the place, complete with pictures of skinned, bloody animals and the kind of slant to their message that almost suggested these animals were skinned alive, screaming in torment.

I wonder if these PETA creatures and their “progressive” friends would be offended were photographs to be posted publicly of aborted babies and piles of dead animals fallen victim to PETA’s slaughterhouse operation.

Of course they would! Liberals live on what they imagine is a one way street…

by @ 10:42 am. Filed under Liberal Hypocrisy, Weasels

February 21, 2012

American Children’s Futures Play Second Fiddle To…

…the Saboteurs of Young Minds’ Teachers’ Unions, once again, at the behest of the political left.

At least, that’s what our leftist president wants as he tips his hat to the “progressive” supported American Federation of Teachers.

Valentine’s Day came early last week for the American Federation of Teachers.

Last Monday, President Barack Obama unveiled his budget for 2013 which contains $3.8 trillion in spending – but not a dime of support for the very successful D.C. voucher program.

The AFT has long opposed the Opportunity Scholarship Program (the voucher plan’s official name) because it allows low-income students in the District of Columbia to escape the union-controlled dropout factories known as D.C. Public Schools. Since 2004, thousands of students have been given vouchers ranging from $8,000 to $12,000 to attend the private school of their choice.

In the AFT’s view, not only do vouchers siphon off dollars that should be going to “their” schools, but the success many voucher students achieve through the program exposes the deficiencies of union-run schools. That’s why it wants to shut down the program.

It seems to me that anyone entitled to claim he or she is an American and/or anyone professing to have even the smallest amount of concern for the future of American youth would be outraged by the above.

However, there are those hypocrites over there on what Seth likes to call the Port Side who speak through both sides of their mouths, most of whom send their children to private schools because they can afford it, and because they know what short shrift their offspring will receive from the public school system.

Among these is one Barack Hussein Obama.

And Obama has been a willing accomplice. He tried to snuff out the Opportunity Scholarship Program in 2009 by announcing that no new students would be allowed to join. House Speaker John Boehner got it restored through 2016 as part of last year’s budget deal, but that is in jeopardy, as Obama’s budget makes clear.

According to the American Federation for Children, OSP students have a “91 percent graduation rate (which) is 21 percentage points higher than those who applied but couldn’t get a scholarship.”

“And according to the Institute of Education Sciences – the primary research arm of the U.S. Department of Education – the OSP has the second highest achievement impact of any of the programs it has studied so far,” the group writes in a press release.

WJLA.com interviewed one woman who has four children in the voucher program.

“I didn’t feel [my kids] were getting the proper education in public school and they get the best education here,” Antonia Coles said. “Without the scholarship, I don’t know what I would do.”

But none of that seems to matter to the president, who is facing a tough re-election campaign and needs the money and enthusiasm of his friends in the education establishment. He’s willing to compromise the futures of thousands of D.C.-area children just to keep Big Labor happy.
Meanwhile, the president’s two daughters are attending an expensive private school in D.C., because he can afford to send them there.

The AFT delivered its valentine to the president last week, when it officially endorsed his re-election bid. And now the president has delivered his valentine to the AFT, in the form of a voucher-free budget proposal.

Oh, the things we do for love … and the things politicians do for votes.


by @ 8:56 am. Filed under Liberal Agendas, Liberal Priorities, The President

February 19, 2012

Roadmap To Greece

“Roadmap to Greece”, love it! :-)

From The Hill:

Republicans bashed President Obama on Saturday for his “broken” fiscal policies, including his recent budget proposal, which they said would pit America on “a roadmap to Greece.”

In the GOP’s weekly address Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Wash.) pointed to high unemployment numbers, a staggeringly high deficit, and high gas prices as evidence that Obama’s economic strategy has failed and was leading the U.S. towards financial ruin.

“If we keep on going like this, the consequences will be devastating,” said McMorris Rogers. “As we’ve learned from Greece and the European Union, no country can escape the costs of big government policies forever. The president’s budget isn’t a blueprint for America – it’s a roadmap to Greece.”

“It didn’t have to be this way,” she continued. “The president and his party have been given numerous opportunities to rein in spending and help create a better environment for job creation, and they’ve punted almost every time.”

Oh, yes, Greece.

What are Obama and the rest of the Democrats thinking?

Much of Obama’s failure to turn the U.S.’s financial state around, McMorris Rogers said, was due to the Democratic philosophy that a strong economy needs to be bolstered by a robust government.

“You see, the president and his party have it all wrong,” she said. “They believe they can grow the economy and create jobs by increasing government spending and raising taxes, including taxes on small businesses.

“But the American people know that the way to grow the economy and create jobs is by cutting government spending and keeping taxes low for all taxpayers.”

Yes, but… but… the American people have no say in any of this, since as we also know, our president is one of those left wingers whose political philosophies would have been better practiced in a different country.

by @ 12:17 pm. Filed under The Economy, The President

February 18, 2012

It’s About Time 2

Alabama is certainly less bloodthirsty toward than the party of Obama.

From One News Now:

A wrongful death case in Alabama calls into question Roe v. Wade, the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

On Friday the Alabama Supreme Court issued a landmark decision, according to Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel, because it allows an individual mother to bring a wrongful death complaint on behalf of her unborn child — even though the baby could not have lived outside the womb at the time the infant died.


The ramifications here?

“… The concurring opinion by Justice Tom Parker goes through the historical as well as the legal precedent to show that Roe v. Wade’s viability standard is ill-conceived and ultimately does not apply, but should eventually also be overturned,” the Liberty Counsel founder explains.

Parker wrote that “Roe’s viability rule was based on inaccurate history and was mostly unsupported by legal precedent. Medical advances since Roe have conclusively demonstrated that an unborn child is a unique human being at every stage of development.”

One can only hope that this means science, the thing the left falsifies, bastardizes, revises and politicizes, then points to in order to advance political objectives, has once again turned around and returned to bite them where the moon doesn’t shine. :-)

Maybe, just maybe, this decision will set a precedent that will (hopefully) lead to the overturn of Roe vs Wade. If so, we can naturally expect a brutal fight from the left side of the aisle, their communist media allies (Times Corp, other usual suspects) weighing in heavily with the routine chorus of lies and half truths where science is concerned.

If the truth somehow prevails (I say “somehow” because it all too often doesn’t in today’s liberal dominated atmosphere), perhaps all those “unborn” children slated for murder in the future by “progressives” will be spared, their right to live protected by a deep sixing of R vs W.

That is significant, says Staver. “It clearly shows that viability — the ability to live outside the womb — is just a medical, technological issue and has nothing to do with the dignity of the human being,” states the attorney. “[It says] that the human being is a human being from the moment of conception and should be treated as such through all stages of development.”

Friday’s Alabama Supreme Court ruling in Hamilton v. Scott was unanimous. Three other justices joined Judge Parker in the concurring opinion.

Take that, baby killers!

by @ 1:51 pm. Filed under Correcting An Injustice, Dealing With Liberals

February 17, 2012

You may recall this post on the Komen Fund deciding to discontinue their largesse to Infanticide Central Planned Parenthood, after which they rescinded that decision.

Well, from the Washington Times:

Susan G. Komen’s short-lived decision to drop grants to Planned Parenthood was met with fury from the left wing, and its outrage was immediately reported by the liberal news media. But it wasn’t the first time Komen had been attacked from the left. As a private charity, Komen was within its rights to not renew grants for breast health care for Planned Parenthood, a group that doesn’t even perform mammograms, but that wasn’t how the media covered it. CNN blamed the decision on conservatives, while MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell claimed that “the politics of stopping Planned Parenthood has now put more women at risk of dying from breast cancer.”

It didn’t take long for that uproar on the left to prompt a reversal of Komen’s decision, and for Komen Vice President Karen Handel to resign from the breast cancer charity. The controversy also renewed criticism of Komen over a completely different issue: whether or not the common chemical BPA (formally known as bisphenol A), is a risk factor for breast cancer.

Above emphasis mine.

Can you believe this?

Of course you can! After all, we’re talking liberals, here, particularly the liberal…um, “progressive” media, for whom truth plays second fiddle to political agendas.

Read the whole thing here.

So you might say the Komen Fund was mugged by Planned Parenthood, the left wing media and their weaselist infanticidal proponents.

February 16, 2012

One of those “Hmmmm…” posts

1. From the latest Ann Coulter column:

One theory for why Barack Obama pushed the contraception mandate right now is that it helps Rick Santorum. Others theorize it’s because Obama is an anti-religious bigot with a left-wing agenda. Reasonable minds can disagree on this.

But it may end up helping Mitt Romney by reminding people that the “individual mandate” is the least of the problems with ObamaCare. (The “individual mandate” is simply the legal argument for why ObamaCare is unconstitutional in a country that has accepted Social Security and Medicare as constitutional.)

This isn’t a Catholic issue or even a religious issue. Conservatives are falling into the Democrats’ trap by denouncing it as such. It’s a freedom issue. (Or, as Democrats call it, “the F-word.”)

If liberals like it, it’s subsidized; if they don’t, it’s prohibited. And now they can impose their left-wing authoritarianism on the entire country by calling their mandates and prohibitions “insurance.”

Well put!

The column here.


As I’ve said previously, the big bad Wolf and I don’t have a computer at home, in fact our cell phones are of the basic variety used to hold telephone conversations, not text or surf the web. We do our best, for the most part, to live an analog life.

I’ve been spending a lot more time than usual in Manhattan of late, where there are Apple stores (4 of them!) and of course computers in the New York Public Library — hence, more posting.

I don’t know how it is elsewhere, but here in NYC, aside from the overcrowding and the blatantly rude attitudes of most of the locals, it’s getting more and more like something out of Logan’s Run or some other decades-old SciFi saga every day.

Take the subway, there are recorded voices warning of everything from stepping in the gap between the train and the platform when you exit or enter, about safeguarding your possessions and keeping an eye out for abandoned luggage (if you see something, say something). There are recorded voices advocating safety on escalators, others extoling the virtues of substance sniffing K-9s while warning you not to pet them nor get too close.

There’s even a recording you hear at 59th Street and Madison Avenue: “The walk sign is on to cross Madison Avenue…”

Between all the people on the sidewalks and (dangerously) in their cars texting with others and proper conversation seemingly on the way out (who needs to talk to, say, his or her spouse on arriving home when they’ve been running a text dialogue all day long, detailing their every respective movement, what they had for lunch and their every thought from their A.M. goodbye to their evening commute?), we have all but become a race of high-technology dependent mutants. :-(

Maybe that last bit explains the apparent increase we hear on the streets in couples arguing with a “you haven’t listened to a word I’ve said!” theme…

Meanwhile, in the Nanny State millieu.


Conservative Christian groups are outraged that a school decided a lunch a preschooler’s mother prepared was not healthy enough and replaced it with chicken nuggets.

The elementary school in Raeford, North Carolina, decided the four-year-old’s lunch — which consisted of a turkey-and-cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice — did not meet nutritional standards established by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Why? Because it did not contain a vegetable.

The USDA guidelines say lunches, even those brought from home, must consist of one serving each of meat, milk, and grain, and two servings of fruit or vegetables. Those guidelines — introduced last month as “historic improvements” by the federal government — spring from the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act championed by First Lady Michelle Obama as part of her Let’s Move! Campaign and signed into law by President Barack Obama.

HELP!!!! This is just going too far!!!!

It’s little surprise that: …spring from the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act championed by First Lady Michelle Obama as part of her Let’s Move! Campaign…

Dr. Janice Crouse, senior fellow for the Beverly LaHaye Institute at Concerned Women for America, sees the incident at the North Carolina school as historic in another sense. She says it is just another way government intrudes on the rights of parents.

“It’s another way that the government says it knows best, another way to waste taxpayer dollars, quite frankly, and to really irritate parents,” Crouse tells OneNewsNow.

Ooooh, if these commie-bamas had been around when Wolf and I were raising our two sons and had tried that same garbage!

At this point, had I been a drinking woman, I would no doubt be reaching, hands trembling with anger, for a bottle of something suitably strong… Instead, I’m being “good” and merely gnashing my teeth with rage that this country, founded in the name of freedom, is gradually becoming anything but as the left slowly and inexorably advances toward a takeover as it has in so many other countries where, like here, those of right thinking persuation increasingly sit by and allow those who would deprive us, from within, of liberty to have their way…

by @ 2:28 pm. Filed under Hmmmmmm....

February 12, 2012


Who says they can’t hack it?

The website of the Central Intelligence Agency was inaccessible on Friday after the hacker group Anonymous claimed to have knocked it offline.

“CIA Tango down,” a member of Anonymous said on @YourAnonNews, a Twitter feed used by the group. “Tango down” is an expression used by the US Special Forces when they have eliminated an enemy.

Actually, according to my hubby, a “tango”, specifically, is a terrorist, but let’s not stray.

Article here.

by @ 11:06 am. Filed under Homeland Security, The Internet

February 11, 2012

The “American” Left & The Constitution

From the NRA-ILA:

It is certainly no surprise for gun owners to see the New York Times run a story belittling the United States Constitution. After all, the Times has worked for decades to devalue our founding document.

“[I]ts influence is waning,” opines the Times. It is “terse and old, and it guarantees relatively few rights.” The paper faults the Constitution for being difficult to amend and reflective of the times in which it was written. While the Times does not go so far as to claim the U.S. Constitution has been bad for America, it does lament that it is of “little current use to, say, a new African nation.”

Hmmm. While the article focuses on the N.Y. Times, the next paragraph refers to one of the poster creatures of the “progressive” menagerie, their agent on the Supreme Court:

But it was a much bigger shock when the Times reported in the same story that Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a sitting associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court and grande dame of the Court’s liberal voting bloc, shares the Times’ dim view of the Constitution. Ginsburg said “I would not look to the United States Constitution if I were drafting a constitution in the year 2012.” Her personal recommendations would instead include “the South African Constitution, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the European Convention on Human Rights.”

None of this should come as a surprise. One wonders, for example, if Justice Ginsburg even looks to the United States Constitution when interpreting it in 2012. Having had only limited success in getting the courts to creatively re-imagine the Constitution to suit their individual tastes, America’s legal, academic, and media elites are now determined to minimize what is left of the founding charter’s original meaning and intent by making unflattering comparisons to “sexier,” more expansive documents that empower state bureaucracies, undermine individual rights, and micromanage citizens’ day-to-day lives.

A good definition of a liberal (besides “someone who’s never been mugged”, LOL) is an individual who takes full advantage of the liberties that come with living in a free country while trying to destroy those freedoms at the same time.

Do these people have issues, or what?

Anyway, the entire NRA-ILA article is here.

February 10, 2012

They just keep on “keepin’ on”


Who dya’ think? Those enemies of every American morality, our every moral value, the very common sense that has made our nation a leader among nations.

Yes. Liberals…Excuse me, “progressives.” This time they’re popping up at Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania.

Shippensburg University in Pennsylvania is now selling the “morning-after” pill via a vending machine. A pro-family group in that state believes that sends the wrong message to students.

For $25, people with access to campus health services at Shippensburg can buy Plan B from a machine, just like they would a soda or a bag of chips. Diane Gramley of the American Family Association of Pennsylvania finds that appalling.

“To begin with, they’re approving the sexual activity of their students — and they’re not providing the young ladies with the correct information about Plan B, about the morning-after pill,” Gramley explains. “If they are pregnant, it actually does not allow the implantation of the fertilized egg — and that’s just killing their baby.”

Ah, thereby doing some of Planned Parenthood’s work for it. (above emphasis is mine)

What’s next? Providing bedrooms on campus specifically for students to use by the hour?

by @ 10:51 am. Filed under Liberal Agendas

February 9, 2012

Obama’s Foreign “Policy”

Today’s Morning Bell from Heritage opines spotly on (spot-on-ly? On spotly? Whatever! :-)) regarding Obama’s foreign policy ala Middle East, aptly titling the piece Middle east Crumbles Around Obama’s Foreign Policy.

Thousands are dead in Syria, with more blood spilled each day. Iran is within arm’s reach of a nuclear weapon, threatening Israel’s very existence. And in Egypt, 19 Americans are banned from leaving the country, making them veritable hostages in an unfriendly land [1]. All indications are that the Middle East is crumbling, and President Barack Obama’s foreign policy is collapsing right along with it.

First look toward Homs, Syria — ground zero in the 11-month-old uprising against the brutal government of Bashar al-Assad, which is unleashing death upon its people minute by minute and hour by hour. The United Nations estimates that Assad’s regime has killed more than 5,000 anti-government protesters in the last 11 months, with 200 killed [2] on Friday night alone. The Arab League has stationed observers in country, whose mission was to oversee compliance with a peace plan. That failed.

The Obama Administration rushed to the United Nations Security Council and attempted to pass a resolution calling for Assad to step aside. Predictably, China and Russia laid down a veto. On Monday, the United States finally closed the doors to its embassy [3] in Damascus and withdrew the diplomatic staff over continuing security concerns. Meanwhile, intelligence experts are examining the risk of terrorists [4]gaining control of Syria’s weapons stockpiles should the Assad regime fall.

To the east in Iran, the regime’s full-steam-ahead pursuit of nuclear weapons is reaching a crescendo, with Defense Secretary Leon Panetta recently remarking [5] that the country could build a bomb within one year and have the means for delivering it one or two years later.

Finally, in Egypt, officials there published a list [6] of 43 people, including 19 Americans, accused of interfering in Egypt’s internal politics. They are not allowed to leave the country and could soon be brought to trial on claims that they illegally funded political groups in Egypt’s parliamentary elections. Heritage’s James Phillips explains [1] that “they have become hostages in a much larger struggle: the struggle for freedom in Egypt against an unholy alliance between Egypt’s transitional military government and the Islamist political parties who will soon assume power.”

President Obama and members of his Cabinet tried to reach Egyptian leaders on the matter [7], but in the words of Lorne Craner, head of the pro-democracy organization IRI, “things are getting worse . . . We are all scratching our heads over here. I did two tours at State and one at the [National Security Council]. If the president called someone, something gets worked out.” But as was the case under President Jimmy Carter, the White House appears helpless while Americans are held captive.

None of these crises occurs in a vacuum — except for the vacuum of a cogent U.S. strategy for dealing with these ever-worsening conditions. Since President Obama took office, he has pursued a diplomatic strategy of charm and restraint: attempting to broker peace between Israel and Palestine, engaging with Syria and Iran, and withdrawing from Iraq. Now we are seeing the results.

One gets the impression that our extremely left leaning, “all politics, all the time” president has completely lost control, like any non manager with no experience to that end who has been promoted to a multi-faceted managerial post: He may hold on for awhile, but eventually the job runs away from him and he finds himself way out of his depth.

Now we have all hell breaking loose all over the Middle East with half these so-called “Arab Spring” states almost surely on their ways into a very HOT Extremist Summer as the fanatics take over. Give it a couple more years for those people to get situated over there, then perhaps the liberals that spawned Obama will come to the realization that the whole “democracy” concept is a farce, that those taking over those countries will largely be anti-U.S. and well disposed toward doing some unpleasant things about it.

But I suppose I’m straying a bit.

Read the entire Heritage Foundation article.

by @ 9:56 am. Filed under The Mideast, The President